That’s an awfully long time for a "lone wolf" to keep his plans to himself, yet the head of Norway’s intelligence agency was quick to state Breivik acted alone – this is spite of Breivik’s own contention, in his online "book," that two other cells of his "Knights Templar Europe" exist. Furthermore, according to Breivik, the Knights were founded at a London meeting in 2002, at which his British "mentor" and representatives from across the continent were in attendance.

What we don’t know, however, is how he did it. Oh, he gives us a detailed account of his obsessive preparations, including how much protein he added to his weightlifting regimen. We know he set up a front company, Breivik Geofarm, supposedly devoted to the growing of tubers, which is how he managed to get the fertilizer that was a key component of his car bomb. What we don’t know, however, is where money came from.

Breivik hadn’t had much income recently, as detailed here – yet he seemed to have some assets. The exact source of these assets is unknown. According to him, he "earned his first million kroner as an entrepreneur at the age of 24." Yet a number of news accounts flatly contradict this, notably the Sydney Morning Herald, which reports:

"Government records suggest that despite his management qualifications, his early attempts at business were a failure until he established Breivik Geofarm in eastern Norway for the cultivation of ‘’vegetables, melons and tubers.’ The business would have given Breivik access to nitrogen-based fertilizer – one of the main ingredients of a fertilizer bomb."

Yet "Breivik Geofarm" was, according to Breivik, just a "front" company, a legal shell meant to shield his activities from prying eyes. We don’t know that he ever grew a single tuber. The Wall Street Journaltells us:

"Government records show Mr. Breivik registered a business, Geofarm, in May 2009, though its main business activity was at first listed as trading stocks and other investments. Tax records show he reported no income that year but listed 390,171 kroner (about $50,000) in unverified assets."

If Breivik’s business ventures were failures prior to the Geofarm project, then where did these unverified assets come from? According to the Independent:

"After school, Breivik did a brief stint in the army, and then appears to have gone from one job to the next. He is believed to have started a computer company and earned enough money to live in a luxury apartment and sport a Breitling watch. However, other reports suggest that for years he worked in a lowly call center and lived almost anonymously.

"… Exactly what he lived on in the run- up to the massacre remains a mystery. But his bank details reveal that in 2007, a sum equivalent to €80,000 (£70,000) was added to his account, which would have enabled him to live without having to work."

The mystery deepens….

Check out Breivik’s resume here, wherein he claims to have been the "managing director" of "E-Commerce Group AS," which is described as a "part investment company – 50%, part sales/outsourcing company – 50%," with a "total of 7 employees: 3 in Norway, 1 in Russia, 1 in Indonesia, 1 in Romania, 1 in the US." Like Breivik Geofarm, he says:

"This was a front (milking cow) with the purpose of financing resistance/liberation related military operations. The company was successful although most of the funds were channeled through a Caribbean subsidiary (with base in Antigua, a location where European countries do not have access): Brentwood Solutions Limited with bank accounts in other Caribbean nations and Eastern Europe. E-Commerce Group was terminated in 2007 while most of the funds were channeled in an ‘unorthodox manner’ to Norway available to the coming intellectual and subsequent operations phase."

There is no online record of Breivik’s "E-Commerce Group AS," as far as I can see: an odd happenstance for an e-commerce outfit, wouldn’t you say? As for Brentwood Solutions Limited, there is no record of those guys, either: however, there is a Brentwood Solutions LLC in Naples, Florida. In any case, what I want to know is how did Breivik manage to get his hands on the equivalent of nearly $115,000 added to his account in 2007? If the money was legitimately earned, then why hide it in Caribbean and Eastern European banks and why go through "unorthodox" procedures in order to sneak it into Norway?

Okay, now let’s summarize what we know about Breivik’s money trail, based not on what he says in his diary but on what little investigative reporting has been done on the matter. It boils down to this: His tax records show a small income in 2007 – the year all that money miraculously appeared in his bank account – and a bit more in 2008. He had no reported income in 2006 and 2009. Prior to that, there is no evidence of his "first million" anywhere to be seen.

While his diary emphasizes that he saved every penny to finance his terrorist operation, there had to be some income coming in from somewhere. And then there’s that mysterious $115,000 – did he rob a bank? Or did he have a benefactor? Here is where Breivik’s money trail simply … trails off.

The idea that Breivik acted alone is absurd: he had to have help, just on logistical matters, never mind the financial side of such an operation. Furthermore, it’s hard – nay, impossible – to believe he kept the secret to himself for nine years. In order to escape detection, and have the means to carry off such a complicated operation, Breivik must have had some organized assistance – and not from amateurs, by any means. At this point, we don’t know from whom.

However, we can see in the reaction to his murderous assault a kind of support network that has sprung up, if not to defend him personally then to defend his motivations and the ethos from which his hatred welled up. As I have said in my othercolumns on this subject, the so-called counter-jihadist milieu – whose writings were copiously cited in the online manifesto – provided the theoretical basis for Breivik’s horrific actions. The "anti-jihadist" pro-Israel blogosphere played an important role in reinforcing and elaborating Breivik’s crazed worldview, and there is even some frightening evidence that they played more of an activist role than that.

"I am running an email I received from an Atlas reader in Norway. It is devastating in its matter-of-factness.

"Well, yes, the situation is worsening. Stepping up from 29 000 immigrants every year, in 2007 we will be getting a total of 35 000 immigrants from somalia, iran, iraq and afghanistan. The nations capital is already 50% muslim, and they ALL go there after entering Norway. Adding the 1.2 births per woman per year from muslim women, there will be 300 000+ muslims out of the then 480 000 inhabitants of that city.

"Orders from Libya and Iran say that Oslo will be known as Medina at the latest in 2010, although I consider this a PR-stunt nevertheless it is their plan.

"From Israel the hordes clawing at the walls of Jerusalem proclaim cheerfully that next year there will be no more Israel, and I know Israel shrugs this off as do I, and will mount a strike during the summer against all of its enemies in the middle east. This will make the muslims worldwide go into a frenzy, attacking everyone around them.

"We are stockpiling and caching weapons, ammunition and equipment. This is going to happen fast.

"Before, I thought about emigrating to Britain, Israel, USA, South Africa, etc. for taxes and politics, but instead (although I believe we are the very last generation on earth before the return of God) I will stay and fight for the right to this country and indeed the entire peninsula, for the God-fearing people, just in case this isn’t the end of the world after all. Doesn’t hurt to have a backup plan.

"It’s far from impossible to achieve, after all my people has done it every time before, in feats that match the ancient Greek, hebrew and british ‘legends’.

"Oslo and the southeast may fall easily, but there are other lines than ‘state’-borders drawn across this country since long before there was even a single muslim in the world, and we have held them this long, against everyone else too. We are entering a new golden age for my people, and those of a handful other countrys, but only through struggle.

"Never fear, Pamela. God is with you too in this coming time."

In the comments, one of Geller’s readers warns that the author of the letter could be prosecuted by Norewegian authorities. Geller replies: "Yes … which is why I ran it anonymously."

So here is some nut stockpiling "weapons, ammunition, and equipment," because "this is going to happen fast" – with Geller’s enthusiastic encouragement. Indeed, she’s so concerned her correspondent might be arrested that she’s protecting his identity.

Who is Geller’s mystery correspondent – is it the same Norwegian nut-case who ruthlessly cut down dozens of children, or a different one waiting in the wings to do the same? Come on, Pamela – clear up the mystery. Or would you rather continue to shield your fellow "counter-jihadist"?

I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the leaders and "scholars" who provided Breivik with the intellectual and political support he needed also provided more substantial support, such as ensuring the confidentiality of communications with the "Knights." Geller has already gone on the public record as supporting the thugs of the English Defense League, who troll the streets of British cities looking for Muslim victims – why not Breivik?

All this sounds like a good excuse for the government to protect us. You know, suspend more civl liberties, take away more freedoms, spy on us even more, gather (forcibly if necessary) DNA from more of us, that sort of thing. You know, for the children and all. Maybe we could even get Toby Keith to sing on the Mike Huckabee show about how great it is to live in such a free country.

Interesting indeed. At first I thought that it's not all that improbable to keep a plan like this to yourself for years, especially if Breivik was a loner and thought perhaps that his fellow countrymen were brainwashed pro-multicultis (did he not attend church as a supposed Christian?). But in this lovely era of the interwebs where even a cannibal can find someone willing to be cannibalized, investigators have to look closely at his web social life, surely he wasn't a complete loner there. His computer ought to be a treasure of information, with whom did he correspond, who encouraged him, etc. Did "Fjordman" have any part in any of Breivik's activities? Who helped him move tons of material? Then there's the money. He says he's spend 130000 Euros out of his own pocket to create his compendium–that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. In order to finance this guy, someone would have to have met with him I imagine and see his progress and commitment. Not even filthy rich anti-jihadist neocons would just wire over a bunch of money to this guy without some assurances.

Despite the fact that some US readers might take exception to the final line of this article, reserving the 'lone wolf with the most company' accolade for Lee Harvey Oswald, this is an excellent piece which asks all the right questions. Thanks Justin. Watching the campaign to defile Islam here in Britain, it has long been obvious that these race hate groups enjoy the sanction of much of the British Press, which has retailed vilification of Muslims for years now. The effect has been to make these ignorant bigots and their world view respectable in the eyes of the wider public.
Much of the British establishment was enamoured with Hitler in the mid 1930's and this extended even to members of the Royal family. The odds on seeing any of what are essentially 'highly respectable people' being hauled in for questioning any time soon are about as slim as finding out who killed John Kennedy. We're unlikely therefore to ever discover the identities of Breivik 's benefactors.

1. "[…] although I believe we are the very last generation on earth before the return of God"

It sounds like Breivik would fit in well with the Evangelical crowd in the US.

2. If the US DoJ was serious about going after terrorists and terrorist suspects, the US government would have long looked into the likes of Geller and Pipes and all the other hatemongers. Alas the US government is afraid of them as much as it is afraid of AIPAC and by extension the Israeli government. As far as the US is concerned, these people are untouchable.

The White House has put someone like Al-Awlaki on an assassination list without providing a shred of evidence, but non-Muslims who aid and abet terrorists, get away with it scot-free. It's unabashedly hypocritical.

Finally, this was a good article, Justine. You've tied together a lot of important details.

What I find curious is that the financial support Breivik received seems to have come from a professional organization, someone who knew how to funnel money without a trace, someone who knew how to set up front companies. I'm inclined to think that he had the support of an intelligence agency, but I'll refrain from jumping to such conclusions until more evidence comes to light.

He also claims to have lost a significant amount (several million) in speculative activities. That sounds like a safe way of passing money on to another person similar to himself – safe that is until, and if, the financial activities are investigated. This could be a 'Murdoch moment' if the Norwegians follow through.

One other thought. Brentwood Solutions Limited sounds like a British outfit. Brentwood is a place in the UK and Limited is used by British limited liability corporations (maybe other countries as well?). He has links with EDL who are financially backed by one Alan Lake. He lives in a very upscale part of London and claims to have made his money by selling a software company. If that was a private company sale, then there is another good way of transferring money with minimal exposure. Hmmm, very interesting.

No way Breivik is/was a 'lone wolf'- but I already knew from Day One that the minute he was identified as a White Guy ™ the label of Terrorist would be quickly replaced by some variation of 'lone wolf' or 'deranged individual' or just a simple 'extremist'.

The money trail alone is enough to raise serious questions- and while I'm sure there are investigators working on that I'm just as sure there are others working just as quickly to hide the traces. Your average skinhead type probably isn't going to go to extreme methods to launder money, but you can bet an established national intelligence agency- or agencIES- will have the resources to do exactly that.

I do find it rather revealing of the hypocrisy displayed in the West regarding Terrorism(tm); if THEY do it, that's Terrorism- if WE do it, well…. it's okay, we said it is legal so it must be- and if we didn't do it, it was just some nut who went off the deep end. I am sick to death of the 'deranged individual' defense for despicable acts that would get any Muslim hauled into court and put on trial for his life, whether he had anything to do with it or not. With regard to the Geller e-mail, I'd be very interested to discover if the author was Breivik or was connected to him- and if ether of those is demonstrated, will Geller be prosecuted for not going to the authorities with this warning- indeed a 'credible threat'? Don't hold your breath on it, though. BUT you can bet if the letter originated from someone with a Muslim name and the content was anti-Jewish or anti-Western in language, there'd be no end to how many agents would have been immediately put on the case.

Given that Breivik is an avid supporter of the Zionist state of Israel, it seems to be more than just a mere coincidence, as I've mentioned before, that Breivik committed his mass killings in Norway on the 65th anniversary of the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem. It appears as though, at least to me it does, that Breivik was emulating the Irgun, the infamous Zionist paramilitary group that not only bombed the King David Hotel on July 22, 1946, but terrorized and killed scores of Palestinian Arabs, from the late 1930s to the late 1940s.

And since the Irgun was a political predecessor to Israel's right-wing Herut (or "Freedom") party, which led to today's Likud party, an investigation should be conducted to determine whether or not Benjamin Netanyahu and other prominent Likudniks deserve some of the blame for the mass killings in Norway. And if they do, then, by all means, they should be put back on the terrorist watch list, where they belong!

the 'deranged individual' defense for despicable acts that would get any Muslim hauled into court and put on trial for his life, whether he had anything to do with it or not.
——————————————————————————————————————

If they're lucky. The normal process seems to be either a trial behind closed doors — sub rosa — or the red eye to Guantanamo.

While I am convinced that this is an act of Zionist false flag terrorism, why must the Western world always be either pro-Jew or pro-Muslim, Anti-Jew or Anti-Muslim. Do we have a culture of our own to protect? Does anyone even care? Or shall we fight for one side or the other, while Western culture slowly vanishes into history.

Why is it that individualists (including myself) get caught up defending particular nations, and religions, as long as they are not Western or Christian. The national question is something Liberty-loving people have to address honestly.

On this issue–Last showings of Demockracy Now with Any Goodman, not a word or connections to Israel. . Notice like the 911 attacks,media does not dare connect Israeloperatives? What stinks about these two is both blame Muslims.But Norway capper is odd–twisting the whitedoneit facts and blame the Muslims July 22 1947 King David Hotel-/July 22 2011 Norway Killings Nope!-scores of British died and England left Palestine with it's tail between it's legs. Did the UN do something about it or USA or Canada? Yes–pumped Billion$ intoit and sinister planned killings have never stopped.

The investigative agencies would be severely negligent if they aren't asking Pamela to assist them in determining who that poster was. If it was not Breivik, then it could possibly be a member of one of the other cells he alluded to. Investigation-wise, it seems like pretty low-hanging fruit that could pay big dividends and maybe save lives.

Another curious thing is that Breivik's trial is set to begin no sooner than 2012.

Though, it's probably in Norway's [and everyone's] best interest to let the present heightened sentiments settle down, as Breivik's trial is likely to be the equivalent of a PR platform for nationalist, anti-Muslim groups. — Indeed, the Prime Minister has been outspoken about seeking to avoid fanning the flames of national [and international] "insecurity" and further bigotry …

Meanwhile, the US has been nagging Norway for years to get on the 'War on terror' band wagon, stressing that the country needs to beef up its security, spy on its population and, particularly, track potential 'Al Qaeda sleeper cells' in its midst. Norway consistently has told the US to get lost.

While blamed for lax security, it's quite possible, likely even, that Norway already has the means to be confident that none of its immigrant populations poses a threat to Norway, much less to anyone else.

To me, this attack in Norway begins to smack of a post WWII, Gladio-type scheme, in which anti-communism is replaced by anti-Islamism. Norway has complained openly, repeatedly, of the violation of its sovereignty by US intelligence cells it has discovered within its borders …

It's the same old, 'us vs. them' construct, amounting to contrived 'threats' which, by grace of seamless collusion between oligarchy and propaganda mouthpieces [MSM], has made the domination of countries, and their resources, palatable to key populations.

Here we are, as ever …

Today, the pressing agenda is for renewed ethnic cleansing, in Europe, South West Asia, Iraq and North Africa, the better to break select countries up into powerless, easily consumable morcels.

May Norway's level-headed leaders show the way to putting an end to this Orwellian nightmare.
.

If you are white than killing mass numbers of people as dictated by your sick religious-political views means your a 'lone wolf', 'madman' or 'extremist' who 'acted alone'.

If you are non-white the same act means you are a 'terrorist' attached to a shadowy 'terrorist organization' both of which are reflective of 'twisted religion/culture' you were raised in.

Breivik's killing were a clear act of '(conservative) christian terrorism' but that very term is a thought-crime to many corporate media pundits because the whole 'War of Terror' has been defined as 'conservative christians V. islamic terrorists (and their liberal allies)'.

I think the difference is very clear. The Unabomber and Tim McVeigh were lone wolves, even though they had the assistance of a few people. And they saw America still as their country. Muslims and the other Middle Easterners regardless where they live don't see that country as theirs. And they have an organization that Lone Wolves lack. We haven't seen organized home grown terrorism in developed countries in a while, the likes of Baader Meinhoff or the worse kind that has plagued developing countries like FARC, Sendero Luminoso, etc. Those are highly organized, have thousands of members, financing, are somewhat transnational as they get support from allies, etc.

Another aspect of this story, which no newspaper seems to call much attention to, is that Oslo is of course the scene of the Oslo Accords in 1994, during Clinton. Of course the talks began in 1991, in another place which experienced a terror attack, Madrid. The Israeli participant in the Oslo talks was Rabin, who was assassinated for his very participation in them. "Knights Templar" can have some strange bedfellows, and not just for stirring them up.

I understand the Labour government of Norway is of long standing – and was probably in power during these talks.

According to today's papers, two recent funerals of victims of the island shootings give them Moslem names, so the killer actually shot both native Norwegians and those with immigrant roots.

One of the banners on the island, held by teens, said "Boycott Israel". This has morphed in the popular press here into "Death to Israel" but the two are not the same thing. Extremism only makes it so. Boycotts have traditionally been directed at sending a message of protest about policies. But in some minds, this strikes at the roots of survival and represents hate speech. In a world in which Rabin would be assassinated for conceding that Palestinians have rights, this makes a macabre sense. Strange bedfellows…the enemy of my enemy is my friend… is the kind of provisional thinking which makes bankrolling this fascist Breivik by a zealot well within the realm of possibility. One need not confine oneself to the traditional Nazi types in this crazy present world.

I'm sorry, but what credibility have these media alleged depictions of Breivik's finances (or financing)?

Obviously, a lone wolf, madman, misguided sociopath would have a lesser impact than a conspiracy. Furthermore, subsequent law enforcement "enhancements" (for the time being Norway government announced a paltry increase in police force) should only "benefit" from a scary, repeatable, preferable endless threat. A lone individual action simply isn't enough.

Brevik's diaries also fit in the common theme of paranoid conspiracists (as opposed to "legitimate" powers-that-be organized covert ops). "They" are dangerous because they take common topics, ideological concepts, social debates and mix them into something that ultimately justifies extreme violence. Of course, after the initial shot was fired, curiously enough, the violence falls on the heads of the perpetrators and the fallout on the head of the entire society.

Diaries belonging to someone whose hands are covered in blood tend to divert discussion of serious problems which are there regardless of what Breivik thinks about them. The social tensions forced multiculturalism has caused are real and writings like this help those who are interested in blaming all kinds of "terrorists" for all the evils imaginable instead of admitting the failure of an ill conceived project.

While certain details might raise suspicion that it would be too simple to consider this the action of a single individual, isn't also very convenient the "public opinion" instantly found itself privy to the assasins' thoughts and planning with these breivikleaks?

Just to add something that might help investigators to find out about the real director and producers of the show,Norweigian police should look for Students selling Art in the streets and a should look in CCTVs for some guys high 5ying in OSLO Centrum after the first strike.

You've done some good homework here, but it's not enough to hook up Breivik's atrocity with a vast crypto-Zionist conspiracy. It's possible he had connections to Geller and her ilk, he even may have gotten funding from some ultra-neoconservative sources. But I can't believe any of them would risk their futures and reputations by helping engineer murder of children and terror bombings. Maybe they intended only to be patrons for the writer of an anti-jihad "Turner Diaries".

You seem to be missing the point of the article. Justin has laid out exactly how it is very likely that Breivik had a well-organised international support network. That support was ideological for sure, and may well have included material as well.

Why not? Like-minded people in the US have "engineered" the killing of tens of thousands of children in far away places by the US military, and managed to have covered their tracks pretty well. Some of them actually have ended up richer for it. These people know how to get others to do the killings and never have it traced back to them.

Well… politicians who've supported our wars are nothing if not public about it, and there's little occulted about journalists and warhawk think tanks that built cases for aggression in Afghanistan and Iraq. Stockholders in makers of war materiel are a few Google clicks away. I don't know if they're untraced as relentlessly ignored by our press.

Also, I am more than a little disquieted by Raimondo's notion that there is something sinister per se in a person seeking to hide, to the greatest extent possible, his financial activities from the 'authorities' – the myriad tax-parasites lwho live in palaces at the expense of the productive.

Dunno what you mean by 'extend that courtesy'; if folks I disagree with hide their income from the State… big deal: it is their right. Folks I disagree with drive automobiles, too… you want to ban all driving because bad guys might drive? That's ignorant nonsense.

I would defend the right of people to cnceal income from the State, even if it was 1946 and it was to the terrorists of Irgun Zvai Leumi and Haganah… or if it was today, even to the red-haired fair-skinned douchebags who destroy villages on the say-so of a 3000-year old fable about a goatherd who heard voices promising that he could father the Master Race so long as he cut the end off his cock (and burnt some offal and sprinkled blood around the altar… seriously, that is all 100% retarded).

This al-Awlaki dude is only as insane as Schneerson was when he was alive, and only about half as insane as the authors of "King's Torah". (For the record, I would also defend the right of even Chabad lunatics conceal their financial dealings from 'government', even if I think that the use of the money would be some deplorable type of idiocy).

And even though I think the term 'Holy Land' is laughable, tribal, racist and stupid, I would defend the right of those nutcases to hide income from government, too.

We defend the rights of those whose ideas we despise, or we don't believe in freedom. End of story. That doesn't mean we defend the ACTIONS they take (or are accused of taking) subsequently. I am certain you're totally aware of the difference, and if you claim otherwise you are either bullshitting or an idiot.

If you think al-Awlaki should be killed without trial or due process, simply because of something someone claims he SAID (nobody claims he DID anything), then you are despicable and an enemy of liberty. I hope that every enemy of liberty gets to feel what that's like – that some day someone comes after them without due process simply because of something they believe.

unless the world home on to the real evil english and england the things will be missed againa nd again blaming this group or other rather targetting the real evil which is england.
the evidence for WMD in Iraq was forged with the help of our British friends and a half decent graphic designer.-where ever is evil there is English hands there.

If you think al-Awlaki should be killed without trial or due process, simply because of something someone claims he SAID (nobody claims he DID anything), then you are despicable and an enemy of liberty. I hope that every enemy of liberty gets to feel what that's like – that some day someone comes after them without due process simply because of something they believe.
—————————————————————————————————————

Nice spin.

If you bothered to read this thread alone, you would have found out my stance on due process, especially when I wrote in criticism of Muslim Americans and Guantanamo Bay.

But, somehow, you managed to turn this on me. Whatever.

The point is, not only did Breivik hide his sources of income, as you like to describe it, but he had front companies that have evaporated into thin air. And, given his education and background, it is clear that the guy wasn't some Wall Street financial genius.

So, I wonder why you are advancing the theory that his actions are not suspicious provided one supports the idea that tax evasion is somehow justified.

That's not the point, whether you support that is not the point. That's a debate for another day. What *IS* the point, however, is that you are advocating for illegal practices, for people to break the law as though that is justified, especially in the context of a terrorist like Breivik.

Your entire post comes across like an attempt to divert attention and muddy the waters.

For your information, the Holy Land Foundation was an organization that collected charitable donations for Gaza's children, the injured and unemployed. They sent Gaza school textbooks, crayons, clothes and toys.

In response, some Zionist organization went after them and managed to get the DoJ to charge them with support for Hamas. Two men from the Foundation got some 60+ years in prison.

But, why bother with reality and information when you can jump to conclusion about this author's motives, background and the context of these posts. Right?

Justin, a solid piece that asks some interesting questions, but to date the evidence is not that compelling that there was an organized network behind Breivik. A lot more work will need to be done to unravel any connections to any other individuals or groups. The financial evidence is informative but may only tell us that he used tax havens to shift money around, perhaps from fraud or other illegal activities. No doubt, the Norwegian police are doing much in that area now and will search long and hard. If there are links to others they will be found. Such financial trickery does not necessarily point to a conspiracy or any high level of organisation (as suggested by other commentators) and there are millions of tax evaders using similar strategies based on information available online.

For the first time ever today I came across Geller's blog and was utterly horrified by the vile hatred. At the very least, an ideological friend of Breivik. Geller's blog is truly awful… Breivik and his truly warped ideology requires a milieu and Geller and her ilk provided him with one. Whether that truly amounts to material support is another matter.

"Such financial trickery does not necessarily point to a conspiracy or any high level of organisation […] and there are millions of tax evaders using similar strategies based on information available online. "
—————————————————————————————-

So on the one hand you're asking for more information that directly links Breivik to some support group, but on the other hand you're asserting that there are millions of tax evaders using similar strategies based on information available online.

So, the question arises, have you any data to support the "millions of tax evaders" claim and have you any data to support your claim that such information is all available in some kind of DIY form online?

I just find it amazing that for some commentators (you know, some commentators, those Other ones) the burden of proof threshold changes depending on the perpetrator, white vs. non-white, Christian vs. non-Christian.

Justin, you're asking the right question, but you provide no clue as to the answer.
Here are some relevant facts.

*The person he rented the farm from (for 1000 Euros/month)
was sent to prison for marijuana cultivation (at the same farm Anders rented).

*Anders speaks of "investors" he's supposed to pay back.
They must have invested in the farm, since that is the only business Anders
certainly had and was capable of producing large profits from MJ cultivation.

*Anders has admitted to drug usage (steroids). Almost certainly, the many hours
he spent playing computer role-playing games were accompanied by cannabis
consumption.

Responding first to your gripe about me ascribing motives without reading an author's entire oeuvre: this is the internet, mon brave…

That said: casting my mind back to graduate seminars (during my Masters and PhD candidature in Econometrics), the presenter was responded to on the merits of each individual presentation.

And now to substance:

"… you are advocating for illegal practices, for people to break the law as though that is justified, especially in the context of a terrorist like Breivik."

The distance between us grows, Ari Gillon; indeed I do advocate that people break (I prefer to say 'ignore') the law if the law is unjust.

'Law' is just the codified opinion of a bunch of professional parasites – it has no basis in morality, and certainly no basis in contract: I never agreed to be bound by laws promulgated by the political class – not least the laws that are manifestly unjust.

So if there is a law prohibiting homosexuality – a matter which is nobody else's business – then people who want to be homosexual should ignore that law; anyone who ignores that law is exercising a right to be left alone in decisions that affect only the self. Do you not agree?

If there is a law that says that it is 'illegal' to aid a runaway slave, people should ignore THAT law, too; anyone who ignores that law is a friend of liberty. (The same goes for laws against aiding escaped prisoners if the prisoner is imprisoned as a result of an unjust law – one that does not involve aggressive violations of people or property). Do you not agree?

If there is a law that says that one must not assist Jews in their attempts to avoid the justice mechanisms of the Reich, people should ignore that law. Do you not agree?

If there is a law that says that people will suffer the death penalty for denying the divinity of Christ, then that law too, should be ignored (and men of good consciecne will do everything to protect others who break that law). Do you not agree?

Every person that died in camps during WWII was put there under prevailing 'law' (their incarceration was the result of a declaration that they were internal enemies of the regime – supposedly justified by the March 1933 declaration of 'war' against Germany by the World Jewish Congress): that ought to be enough proof right there that sometimes 'law' is unjust and SHOULD be fought.

And so it goes; these are historical examples, but serve perfectly to illustrate that 'the law' is 99% hogwash (but of varying degrees of tyranny), and that many many many laws SHOULD be opposed, broken, and ignored.

As another example of the mutability of 'law': on April 6th 1933 it was illegal to produce, sell or consume alcoholic beverages in the United States; it had been that way for 13 years. Two days later, the repeal of that despicable interference in free people's lives ended. So what is 'illegal' can change in a matter of 48 hours.

As to whether or not a law is broken by a 'terrorist'; well, I have no idea what motivated Breivik (and – with the notion of 'innocence until proof of guilt' in mind – I cannot judge him to have done anything).

But the fact that he 'hid' his finances from prying eyes is not relevant; he may have done that for reasons totally independent from his motivation for whatever acts he perpetrated. As an example: if he liked porridge, he probably didn't plan to like it as part of his plot.

Also, 'terrorist' is a very fluid sobriquet: if Breivik is found to have done what it is claimed he did, then his actions would certainly fit the bill – his victims had nothing whatsoever to do with his claimed grievances, and in any case as far as I can tell his 'grievances' were based on racial-supremacist, tribal, primitive preposterous idiocy (religion and/or race).

I certainly consider the people who organised the King David Hotel bombing and the Lavon Affair to have been terrorists; likewise George Bush, Dick Cheney and Tony Blair and all those who perpetrated a near-genocide on their orders. (I have difficulty saying the same thing about Hamas and Hezb'ullah, because they are trying to drive out invaders who are there by choice: camp-following zealots are valid targets since they are not 'civilian'… because they are beneficiaries of the invasion itself).

Also – remember that Nelson Mandela was a terrorist, in his day. His conviction and incarceration was notionally for 'treason' (being someone the political class doesn't like), but he was the head of Umkhonto we Sizwe, which undertook a campaign of bombings across South Africa.

I am in no way likening Breivik with Mandela – Breivik is far more like the nutjobs from the Irgun and Hagana, with their racial-supremacist whackjob rhetoric… Mandela was more like Hamas – trying to get an invader off his back. I oppose ALL aggressive violence, but I also endorse asymmetric defensive violence; Brievik's violence (if he did it) was not defensive.

Hope this clarifies.

TL;DR version: break as many unjust laws as you can, but don't ever aggress against the innocent.

My statement was very deliberately **conditional**… that's what an 'if-then' statement means: if A then B… *if* you support extrajudicial assassination, *then* you are an enemy of liberty.

Note that although support for extrajudicial assassination is a *sufficient* condition for being an enemy of liberty, it is not a *necessary* condition: one can be against it and still support other forms of unjustifiable curtailment of people's rights.

Your response is like saying "He called me a girl" if I had written "If you have female sex organs, then you are a female".

A+ on this article. Well done Mr. Raimondo.
Naples, Florida includes conduits to bank accounts in British protectorates. Nobody hands over that much money unless gambling. Gambling thusly leaves the benefactor wide open for the worst of legal prosecution for such an act. Who indeed. The payoff would have to be substantial. Killing as many Norwegian youth as possible because they might, some day, accept too many middle easterners, many of whom are muslims, as citizens in Norway. Sorry, doesn't wash. That is lunacy unworthy of a contribution of over $100,000.00. An investment to clear out the rabble to promote resource access is a cornerstone of the New World Order's self-enrichment program that has taken a turn for the genocidal recently, again. Kissinger, for one, spoke of moving cultures of Indonesians out of the way to facilitate resource access. The song remains the same. The NWO people recently announced an end to their racist policies. Is this what they meant? Not much imagination shown on their part. Rather like Al Gore's stunted attempts at taxing the world. Heavy on the authority, light on the wit. Basing conclusions on defective and fanciful thinking. Won't look good on any resume I can think of. Except this donor.

Stearoids and indoctrination with a push from dear old dad still seems inadequate if his manifesto states his reasons. More likely, the manifesto provides his excuses, which they knew he would need.
I smell Operation Monarch.

At least I don't write witless devil's advocate rubbish like some of your 80-90p favorites. Even a cursory glance at Operation Monarch exposes one of the most deadly and often used Old World authority/CIA application cabals. Certainly worth 1 point or 2. Your 'high regard' is relative. See Activist Post: Architects and Engineers Question…Comments section and see what a 102 should include for strength of information.
Again, A+ for Justin Raimondo on this Beirvik work.

My take on Anders Behring Breivik is that he is an evil phsycopath who killed defenceless children in Norway with calm premeditation. Surrounded by police, he surrendered in the end like the most pathetic and gutless person he was. Someone will be glad to shoot him dead.

Justin Raimondo is the editorial director of Antiwar.com, and a senior fellow at the Randolph Bourne Institute. He is a contributing editor at The American Conservative, and writes a monthly column for Chronicles. He is the author of Reclaiming the American Right: The Lost Legacy of the Conservative Movement [Center for Libertarian Studies, 1993; Intercollegiate Studies Institute, 2000], and An Enemy of the State: The Life of Murray N. Rothbard [Prometheus Books, 2000].